View Single Post
Old
02-10-2005, 02:16 PM
  #11
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos
True enough, but I want to say that the players have shown much more willingness. People tend to forget that the players are NOT for a luxury tax or a rollback. If they could have it their way, the system would stay the same. The middle ground IS a luxury tax. Everytime people act like the players want the luxury tax and rollback, I just want to do this --->
I don't think I ever suggested they *wanted* those things, just that the offerings aren't nearly as big as they seem. The 24% roll-back applies only to those contracts in existence today, and for arbitration purposes...after that it's back to free market. Even if you just used the rate from the past 10 years, that would be eaten up in close to two years...seems hardly a concession, more a diversion.

The luxury tax is a potential workable solution, but so is a cap with bonuses and profit sharing. Do you think owners want to share their profits? The reality as always is that the solution lies somewhere in between...

I think the league has been taking a "I want it all" approach, and I think the players have tried to provide some token movement to move to the center...but to be honest...I don't really care at this point who has moved more, we're just as far from a solution on both sides as we've ever been.

Fish is offline